This post
serves as well as my final review for this book. All The President’s Men is a
history of political journalism which covered the fall of Richard M. Nixon in
one of the most humiliating political scandals in White House. Carl Bernstein
and Bob Woodward were two reporters in Washington Post, they were appointed to
cover a case of breaking-in and tapping at the Democratic headquarter in
Watergate by five people. This soon turned out as extraordinary news, since it
involved several men from President Nixon’s Committee for Re-election of The
President (CRP) team. Interviews being made, and slowly but surely, Bernstein
and Woodward unveiled organized illegal intelligence activities with the aim to
win Nixon as a President. Not only both reporters, but Washington Post as a
whole institution must suffer a lot in its fight to reveal the truth, but—as we
all know—by the help of inside sources and honorable intentions of its crews,
Washington Post had helped people of America to finally force its President to
resign.

From the
series of news published in Washington Post, Bernstein and Woodward then
arranged them into this chronologically crafted history book. It becomes sort
of political detective story, but the fact that this is a true story, made this
book stands out from any other similar themed books. Four stars for All The
President’s Men! And following the first and second level of inquiries
for my The Well-Educated Mind Project, this is my analysis for the third level
inquiry.

Dustin Hoffman & Robert Redford in the movie adaptation

Rhetoric-Stage Reading

What is the purpose of this history?

The main
purpose is to show how people of America were proud of and respected honesty
and honor in their blood; that when the sacred of White House was corrupted,
there are brave people who sacrificed their career—and often their lives too—to
reveal the truth. From the fall, this history also teaches us about how the
conspiracy had been built.

What does it mean to be human?

Carl
Bernstein and Bob Woodward showed us that we as human have the responsibility
to correct the error in all aspects of life; and we must do it with the right
and honest ways, with persistence and commitment.

Why do things go wrong?

Greediness
and arrogance—I think—that had corrupted the White House at that time. Nixon
was in his second period of presidential, he and his men must have thought that because they had put every other institutions—FBI, CIA, Ministry of Justice—under their
control, their illegal activities won’t be revealed. Hunt, one of the
President’s men, even blackmailed the President because he had some evidence
about Watergate. The moral corruption of President and his men had been in the
lowest level when they knew they would surely win.

What place does free will have?

In their
fight to reveal the truth, both reporters and the Washington Post must face a
lot of trials. Bernstein and Woodward were summoned to the court because they
have tried to interview the jury. White House had openly attacked Washington
Post’s reputation, and the newspaper’s stock had been crashed down to 50% in
the stock market. At one time the two reporters were warned that their office
and houses might have been tapped, and their lives were in danger. However—from the
reporters, the senior redactors, to the owner—Washington Post had persistently
kept their intention to supply honest investigations to its readers and to
help the nation to know the whole truth; they fought to the end.

What is the end of this history?

When
Bernstein and Woodward started their coverage for Watergate case, I believe
they never thought where this would have ended; a breaking-in to Watergate was
not unusual anyway. However, when they found that a huge amount of fund and
someone from the closest circle of CRP were involved, they knew that this would
be a delicate case. From then on they always looked at the higher level to see
who was actually in control. Both reporters ended this history book when House
of Representatives finally opened investigation to impeach President Nixon, and
the law process began. Six months after this book first published, Richard M.
Nixon resigned from his office after the Republican announced that they had
been ready to the verdict against Nixon.

If at first
the President and his men still arrogantly challenged their
‘enemies’—Washington Post was their biggest target—at the end President’s men
fought each others, raced to reveal evidences, to get a chance to put the blame on the others. Nixon was under his men’s control and forced to
sacrifice one of his assistants, and at the end his closest friends fell with
him too. In a way Washington Post helped America to clean up their corrupt
government by their journalism. The end of this history opened a new hope of a better presidential (Nixon was succeeded by Gerald Ford).

Carl
Bernstein and Bob Woodward are two Washington Post’s reporters who covered news
of Watergate scandal that forced President Richard M. Nixon to resign his
office. They wanted to reveal the truth—who, why, how—behind the breaking-in
and tapping of the Democratic headquarter.

Who or what causes this challenge?

Watergate
seemed to be controlled by President Nixon’s Committee for Re-election of The
President (CRP) team. Of course, White House denied and covered up any
inquiries from reporters that had any chance to put them in dangerous position.

What happened to the two reporters?

Confronted
with the absolute power of high level executives, the two reporters had bravely
submitted direct inquiries to powerful people, sometimes attacking them through
their news—while kept maintaining the newspaper’s integrity by never reporting something they were not 100% sure of the accuracy —in order to reveal the
truth.

Logic-State Reading

Look for the reporters major assertions

Since this story
was previously written as series of reports in newspaper, Carl Bernstein and
Bob Woodward published this book also as a chronological series of reports; and
therefore I could not find the explicit major assertions within the history.
However, I think the reporters wanted to highlight that it is the nation’s and
people’s responsible to seek the truth about their government, even if it might
have been conducted by the highest levels of authorities. We must always look
at and thoroughly work on all possibilities and chances; that nothing is impossible.

What questions are the reporters asking?

They knew
that Watergate had something to do with the high levels in White House; the
question was how far the moral corruption had infected White House. Did the
President involve in this, did he know about it, or was it merely his men’s
action?

What sources do the reporters use to answer
them?

They dug
every news—new and old ones, every comment from interviews with so many people--but they had also a valuable secret source that seemed to know everything and
involved in the case. This source—nicknamed Deep Throat—has guided the
reporters to find the truth, without revealing his own identity. They also
consulted their lawyer for legal aspects of interviewing, quoting comments and
reporting it for the newspaper.

Does the evidence support the connection
between questions and answers?

In their
reports, the two reporters always followed journalism ethics by cross-examining
and reconfirming news with other sources, and provided the subject chances to
deny or confirm the news. So, I think they always used a respectable evidence
to answer their questions.